Title

Presenter Information

List all Project Mentors & Advisor(s)

Dr. Rosenberger

Presentation Format

Poster Presentation

Abstract/Description

This study expands Segal and Spaeth's (2002) attitudinal model. This model is used to predict Supreme Court justices's decision making process when it decides on cases. However, there is no mention on the types of cases and those groups that have higher accessibility (such as trade organizations) compared to individuals. If the attitudinal model is true, then justices will vote according to their ideology. This study first defines their ideology when they first entered the court, then this study analyzed cases from 2010 -2015 and looked at each case according to five categories. Categories of civil rights, criminal, economic, union, and taxation were scored on how the justice's vote and the ideology of the case. Results show that in most cases the attitudinal model was correct with the exception of economics and taxation. Discussion of what this may infer and other possible variable that impacted this study.

Location

Large Ballroom, Curris Center

Start Date

April 2016

End Date

April 2016

This document is currently not available here.

DOWNLOADS

Since April 10, 2016

Share

COinS

Apr 18th, 12:00 PMApr 18th, 2:00 PM

Where is the Justice? A Critical View of the Supreme Court

Large Ballroom, Curris Center

This study expands Segal and Spaeth's (2002) attitudinal model. This model is used to predict Supreme Court justices's decision making process when it decides on cases. However, there is no mention on the types of cases and those groups that have higher accessibility (such as trade organizations) compared to individuals. If the attitudinal model is true, then justices will vote according to their ideology. This study first defines their ideology when they first entered the court, then this study analyzed cases from 2010 -2015 and looked at each case according to five categories. Categories of civil rights, criminal, economic, union, and taxation were scored on how the justice's vote and the ideology of the case. Results show that in most cases the attitudinal model was correct with the exception of economics and taxation. Discussion of what this may infer and other possible variable that impacted this study.